| ID | | Article Title | Post Date |
|
92 | 
| Hard drives are not recognized in a Fusion D400Q or Fusion R400Q when connected via FireWire or USB. | Sep-21-09 |
| When connected via FireWire, FireWire800, or USB, there must be a drive in the first bay (top bay of Fusion D400Q; left bay of Fusion R400Q); otherwise, the hard drives in the other drive bays will not be recognized. If hard drive is connected via SATA, there is no issue. |
| |
|
101 |
| Fusion storage system activity lights are always on with Seagate ES.2 (Enterprise) drives installed in the drive bays. | Oct-22-10 |
| Sonnet engineering has fixed this issue with some Fusion storage systems. This issue was addressed and fixed as follows:
APRIL, 2008: in Fusion D400Q and Fusion D500P systems with serial numbers beginning with J.
MAY 20, 2008: In Fusion D800RAID with serial numbers beginning with G.
All versions of Fusion R400Q and R800RAID are compatible with Seagate ES.2 Drives.
Note: Seagate ES.2 drives have lower performance than Sonnet recommended drives. |
| |
|
112 | 
| Unable to daisy-chain multiple Fusion D400Q or Fusion R400Q storage systems on a Firewire bus. | May-12-09 |
|
113 |
| Connecting a Fusion D400Q or Fusion R400Q to computer system with USB or FireWire requires a hard drive in drive bay 1. | May-06-09 |
|
120 |
| How do I set up a RAID 0 striped array under Windows XP Professional or Vista? | Mar-23-10 |
|
121 |
| Can I set up a RAID 1 mirrored array under Windows XP or Vista? | Mar-23-10 |
|
122 |
| Fusion D400Q or Fusion R400Q RAID array write performance attached via FireWire under Windows Vista or Windows XP is poor. | May-06-09 |
|
138 |
| Unable to format hard drives after moving a Fusion storage system from a Mac to Windows computer. | Mar-23-10 |
|
387 |
| How do I replace a failed drive under warranty if I'm in a sensitive/classified environment and can't send the old one back? | Mar-23-10 |
|
450 |
| My storage shows 10% more capacity under OS X 10.6 than under OS X 10.5. Why? | Mar-24-10 |
| With Snow Leopard (10.6), Apple adopted the standard usage of terabyte (TB) which equals 1,000,000,000,000 bytes = 10-to-the-12th bytes. Hard drive manufacturers have always specified drive capacity with standard usage which will now match what Mac OS X reports.
WIth Leopard (10.5) and previous versions of Mac OS X, Apple used the binary interpretation of terabyte, (technically a tebibyte) = 1,099,511,627,776 bytes = 2-to-the-40th bytes. Windows also uses binary interpretation.
Under Snow Leopard, drive capacity will be shown per drive specifications. For example, under OS X 10.6, a 1TB drive will appear as a 1000 GB capacity drive (but under OS X 10.5 as a 909 GB capacity drive). For additional information see support.apple.com/kb/TS2419.
What does this mean in real terms? Do I get an immediate increase in storage space?
Formatting or actual capacity does not change at all, only the reported capacity because of the change from base-2 to base-10.
Should I reformat the drives before attempting to plug in a previously 10.5 formatted unit into a 10.6 machine or vice versa?
Reformatting is not necessary at all.
What happens if I plug a 10.6 formatted unit into a 10.5 machine or vice versa?
The volume is seen normally. It is completely compatible and can be transparently moved back and forth. |
| |
|
453 |
| Only the first drive of my Fusion D400Q, D500P, R400P, or R400Q is recognized when I connect via SATA. Why? | Mar-24-10 |
|
459 |
| The performance of my drive array is significantly less than I expect. | Jun-14-11 |
| |
